Introduction

Rajkovic, Nikolas M.; Aalberts, Tanja; Gammeltoft‐Hansen, Thomas

doi:10.1017/cbo9781316535134.002

Cited by 22 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In doing so, they operate as an interpretative community struggling over “what techniques of argument and interpretation are in play for the construction of what can be said to be legal” (Rajkovic et al . , p. 18). Although tasked with monitoring compliance to the letter of the law, they do so through access to the legal practices of the workplace.…”

Section: Discussion: the Jurisgenerative Role Of Social Auditors In Tmentioning

confidence: 95%

Jurisgenerative role of auditors in transnational labor governance

Paiement

2018

Regulation & Governance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article builds on the model of regulatory intermediaries by incorporating insights from the field of legal hermeneutics about the process through which the meaning of a legal rule emerges. It describes how intermediaries can take on a jurisgenerative role in the development of legal rules through their interpretation of legal rules. This role is demonstrated through an analysis of social audits from Chinese and Vietnamese factories involved in the Fair Labor Association (FLA). The analysis illustrates how the integration of fundamental labor rights into the FLA's private Code of Conduct requires auditors to develop new interpretations of the Freedom of Association as a result of uncertainties and contradictions between legal requirements at various levels, as well as with the FLA's own rules. Through this empirical analysis, the article contributes to the literature by identifying regulatory intermediaries’ jurisgenerative capacities when they monitor fundamental labor rights referenced by private governance instruments. It further highlights why legal and regulatory governance scholars need to consider the transformative effects that transnational private labor governance may have on international labor law.

show abstract

Section: Discussion: the Jurisgenerative Role Of Social Auditors In Tmentioning

confidence: 95%

Jurisgenerative role of auditors in transnational labor governance

Paiement

2018

Regulation & Governance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Indeed, such an approach even has the potential of leaving disciplinary boundaries behind altogether (as recently suggested by Rajkovic, Aalberts and Gammeltoft-Hansen 2016; Aalberts and Venzke 2017). The parallel concepts of interpretive communities and communities of practice are a prominent example for such an opportunity (see Rajkovic, Aalberts and Gammeltoft-Hansen 2016), given the growing attention both concepts have received in international legal scholarship as well as within IR's practice turn (e.g. Adler 2005; Bianchi 2009; Adler and Pouliot 2011b; Bueger 2013; D'Aspremont 2015; Waibel 2015; Hofius 2016; Hernández 2017).…”

Section: Ir's Practice Turn and The Possibility Of Interpretive Changementioning

confidence: 99%

“…IR's practice turn, and its burgeoning application to international law (Brunnée and Toope 2011; Meierhenrich 2014; Rajkovic, Aalberts and Gammeltoft-Hansen 2016; Aalberts and Venzke 2017; Dunoff and Pollack 2018a; Dunoff and Pollack 2018b; Wallenius 2019; arguably also Kratochwil 2014), is a particularly fruitful lens for accounting for the practices of interpretation in international law theoretically, and to research them empirically. In particular, practice theory constitutes an opportunity to gain additional analytical traction on international law's more specifically legal, but potentially politically relevant aspects that shape the day-to-day engagement of international lawyers with the international legal order.…”

Section: Ir's Practice Turn and The Possibility Of Interpretive Changementioning

confidence: 99%

Practice theory and change in international law: theorizing the development of legal meaning through the interpretive practices of international criminal courts

Stappert¹

2019

Int. Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The question of change has emerged as one of the main conceptual and empirical challenges for International Relations' practice turn. In the context of international law, such a challenge is brought into particularly stark relief due to the significant development of legal meaning through more informal, interpretive avenues, including through the judgments of international courts. This paper develops a framework for theorizing how interpretive legal practices generate normative content change in international law. Specifically, it uses the example of the development of international criminal law through the decisions of international criminal courts to analyze how legal interpretation can lead to normative change in practice. Drawing on interviews conducted with judges and legal officers at the International Criminal Court (ICC), the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), and the Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL), I analyze how a community of legal practice centered around these courts was able to construct and alter legal meaning in international criminal law, and how such a potential for change was curbed by understandings of the interpretive process and the role of international courts dominant among international lawyers.

show abstract

“…40 In this way, the number of factors which shape (and are shaped by) the practice of legality is expanded beyond the 'formalist box of doctrinal international law ... to ... a broader plurality of actors and scholarships, and also over a multitude of formal and informal international settings'. 41 However, where Brunnée and Toope see all of international society as relevant, Rajkovic, Aalberts and Gammeltoft-Hansen focus on three communities: scholarship, institutions and policymaking. 42 Moreover, as Schindler and Wille argue, Adler and Pouliot's approach overestimates continuity and underestimates uncertainty.…”

Section: Law As a Practice: The Minimalist Idea Of International Law'mentioning

confidence: 99%

Why we should see international law as a structure: Unpicking international law’s ontology and agency

Sinclair

2020

International Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article identifies how three dominant ideas of international law (as a process, an institution and a practice) see its agency, concluding that all three share a reluctance to see international law as doing anything more than enabling the operation of other actors, forces or structures. This article argues that we should see international law as a structure because it possesses both the surface structure of rules, principles, processes, personnel and material elements of the international legal system and a deep structure of values that sits deep within our subconscious. As Shklar’s idea of legalism shows us, legalism plays a powerful role in shaping all our understandings of ourselves and the world that surrounds us. Seeing international law as a structure enables us to see how it locates actors within a social hierarchy and how it behaves in similar ways to recognised structures like capitalism and racism.

show abstract

Introduction

Cited by 22 publications

References 36 publications

Jurisgenerative role of auditors in transnational labor governance

Jurisgenerative role of auditors in transnational labor governance

Practice theory and change in international law: theorizing the development of legal meaning through the interpretive practices of international criminal courts

Why we should see international law as a structure: Unpicking international law’s ontology and agency

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About